Ensured to Jeopardized and Back Again

The amendments to my bill ensured its passage in the House.

They jeopardized its fate in the Senate.

House Bill 410, the Election Reform Act of 2023, would give neighborhoods a voice before a change is made to their polling place.

It would also move the date of next year’s primary to May 14 to avoid a conflict with Passover and Ramadan.

The Speaker added language requiring every local election board to report to the state board on the number of polling places to prevent their reduction in historically disenfranchised communities.

That change guaranteed that my bill would pass the House.

At the Senate hearing, however, the local boards opposed HB 410 because they considered this requirement burdensome.

I learned today, however, that a compromise was reached.

My bill is now on its way to the Senate floor.

Protecting the Right to Vote

When I first wrote you about the need to change next year’s primary election date because it was the first day of Passover, I said the following:

“The Passover holiday celebrates our exodus to freedom.  Centuries later, Election Day celebrates our fundamental right in a democracy – the right to vote.”

Two weeks later, election law bills in both houses have been amended to move next year’s primary from April 16 to May 14.

My legislation, the Election Reform Act of 2023, now includes Delegate Dalya Attar’s amendment.

The new date does not conflict with either Passover or Ramadan.

Over the years, sponsoring laws that protect the right to vote is one of my proudest accomplishments.

When the system works in Annapolis, it is a great thing.

Protecting Our Precious Right To Vote

I was struck by what Martin Luther King III said today on Morning Joe: His daughter now has fewer voting rights and personal rights regarding her body than when she was born.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. declared, “Give us the ballot and we will place judges on the benches of the South who will do justice and love mercy.”

President Johnson worked with Dr. King and other civil rights leaders to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  Johnson felt that when people’s voices are “translated into ballots…many other breakthroughs would follow.”

Voting rights were seen as a major bipartisan priority.

Unfortunately, that is no longer the case.

Last month, President Biden signed into law the marriage equality bill. On another front, the public outcry over the Supreme Court’s abortion decision was felt nationwide, even in deep red states like Kansas.

No such success or fervor met voting rights legislation. The John Lewis Voting Rights Act was defeated by a filibuster.

In Maryland, we have set an example for Congress and other states to follow regarding voting rights.

For example, it is against the law in Maryland to “willfully and knowingly…influence or attempt to influence a voter’s decision whether to go to the polls to cast a vote through the use of force, fraud, threat, menace, intimidation, bribery reward, or offer of reward.”

I sponsored the bill which made this our law.

People responsible for the robo calls urging people not to vote during the final hours of an election were convicted under this law.

This session I will be introducing legislation to extend this prohibition to actions seeking to influence a voter’s decision to vote by any lawful means, including mail-in ballots.

Everyone’s right to vote is precious.  It must be protected.

Throwing away your umbrella, Criminal behavior, and Police Accountability

Protecting our right to vote has been one of my priorities for many years.  The fraudulent robo calls urging people to stay at home on Election Day in 2010 were prosecuted under a law that I wrote. Last year, I was at Northwestern Senior High for early voting and Election Day  The turnout was impressive, especially the number of new voters.

There were flaws in last year’s election as well.  I proposed that we adopt standards for the location of early voting centers.  Legislation was enacted.  Two of my ideas were included in House Bill 1047, which passed the House but not the Senate.

Voters would be advised that an absentee ballot mailed after the last pick-up on Election Day may not be postmarked in time for it to be counted.  If an absentee ballot needs to be corrected, a voter must be notified. For example, you would be given an opportunity to add your signature if you failed to sign the oath.

When the Supreme Court weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg warned, in her dissent, that gutting a provision of that law “when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.”

We don’t know the fate of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  Will the Supreme Court weaken another enforcement provision of this landmark law?  Will a Republican filibuster kill H.R. 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act?

If we have the wrong outcome in Washington, I will introduce legislation next year to provide those protections in Maryland, setting an example for other states by doing so.

 “That attack, that siege, was criminal behavior, plain and simple, and it was behavior that we, the F.B.I., view as domestic terrorism. It’s got no place in our democracy.” That was the testimony of Christopher Wray, Director of the FBI, before a Congressional committee.

We must keep our democratic institutions and our religious institutions safe from these destructive acts.  Senator Shelly Hettleman and I introduced legislation to establish a Task Force on Preventing and Countering Domestic Terrorism.  The task force’s goal: to recommend policies and procedures to prevent and counter domestic terrorism in Maryland.

We cannot let actions remotely like what occurred in the assault on the U.S. Capitol on January 6 happen here.  The Maryland Emergency Management Agency was awarded a federal Homeland Security Grant.  With an amendment to the budget bill, Senator Hettleman and I required MEMA to convene a task force  “to determine how to effectively oppose domestic terrorism in Maryland including, but not limited to, countering online extremism while mindful of First Amendment rights.”

I served on the Speaker’s Workgroup on Police Accountability & Reform. Legislation was enacted requiring that all police officers in the State be equipped with and use body-worn cameras.  An officer may only use force that is necessary and proportional to prevent an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury. A committee of civilians will review any complaint and investigation of misconduct against an officer.

I was actively involved in several of  the work group’s recommendations that are now law.  An officer must intervene if another officer is engaging in illegal or otherwise inappropriate conduct during an arrest.  Officers on the force and officer candidates will be screened for potential bias. An  officer who holds prejudicial views runs a grave risk of improper conduct.  The Maryland Police Officers Scholarship Program will  provide tuition assistance for students who want to be police officers or are current police officers attending a degree program.

I welcome your thoughts on what we accomplished at the 2021 legislative session and what we still need to do.

 

 

Voting Rights

Like many of you, I watched Sunday as Congressman John Lewis, ill with cancer, joined in the commemoration of the 55th anniversary of the voting rights march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge, when a 25 year-old Lewis almost lost his life after his skull was fractured by Alabama state troopers.

I remember seeing the frightful video of that march later that day on tv. I also recall watching President Johnson give his speech to the joint session of Congress a few days later when he introduced the Voting Rights Act. He ended his speech by declaring, in his Texas twang, “We shall overcome.”

I thought about reading more about those events the old fashioned way – in my copy of Taylor Branch’s Pillar of Fire, but I didn’t.

A few hours later, I went to the Meadowbrook Swim Club.

Whom did I run into? Taylor Branch.

He added these details.

The only network to air film of the assault on the marchers was ABC. That night, it cut into a movie, Judgment at Nuremberg.

Spencer Taylor, as one of the judges at the Nazi war crimes trial, had just speculated about how the little guy could stand up to the Nazi government.

That day in Alabama, hundreds of African-Americans had done just that.

Both of us knew that President Johnson, while walking up the aisle of the House of Representatives chamber after giving his speech, had spoken to Congressman Emanuel Celler, chair of the committee that would consider the bill LBJ had just introduced. “Hold hearings on my bill at night and pass it sooner,” LBJ urged Celler.

Taylor told me that four months later, at the signing of the Voting Rights Act, Johnson told Celler, “Now you need to pass my immigration bill.”

I told Taylor that one of my proudest accomplishments as a legislator is that I have introduced and enacted legislation protecting the right to vote.

A Fundamental Right

We were debating the Secure and Accessible Registration Act on the House floor.

Under current law, when you renew your driver’s license or file for benefits, you’re asked if you want to register to vote.

Under this bill, you would be registered to vote when you renew your license or seek benefits but asked if you did not want to be a voter.

In both instances, you would have to demonstrate your eligibility to be a voter..

One of my Republican colleagues said that one of our most cherished rights as an American is the right to be left alone, citing Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.

This is what I said in response:

We are indeed talking about one of our most cherished rights in this debate, the fundamental right to vote. What Lyndon Johnson and many others said is the most important right, the most important civil right.

We have had a steady progression in opening up the ballot since the Voting Rights Act of ‘65. Early voting, absentee ballot. This is just the next step. There are those who’ve tried to make it more difficult to vote, but I would hope that a majority of this body believes that the fundamental right to vote is furthered by this legislation. Thank you.

I was the last person who spoke on the bill.

It passed, 93-46.

This is why I run for office: to protect the right to vote and the other rights secured to each of us in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

A side conversation and Jim Crow states

“Sandy, can we pull the two proposed bills, or slow roll them, while this side conversation takes place?”

A constituent sent me that message today.

I met with him and several colleagues in December to discuss how their businesses could benefit from changes in state law.

That side conversation is taking place, I replied, because the bills were introduced.

I may withdraw this legislation before the hearing dates, March 1 and 15.

Between now and then, however, the side conversation may result in agreement on a policy change that would benefit my constituent and serve the public interest.

—-

At a bill hearing today, I began by saying that House Bill 353 is based on a simple but fundamental premise: before administrative changes are made that could affect the fundamental right to vote, the public is entitled to adequate notice.

My legislation deals with any action related to voter registration, provisional voting, absentee voting, or the location of a polling place.

The state or local boards of election would have to give 48 hours’ notice of a proposed change if it’s on the agenda and post such changes online within 48 hours after they’re made.

This used to be a problem only in Jim Crow states.

However, the Montgomery County Board of Elections voted two years ago to move an early voting polling center from a working class neighborhood to a more upscale community.

After a furor arose, both locations were open for early voting.

All of the skeptical questions today were from Republican legislators.

January 16 – Action on voting rights

John Lewis nearly died when he marched over the Edmund Pettis Bridge.

Alabama state troopers fractured his skull.

Within days, President Johnson spoke to a joint session of Congress.

He concluded his speech introducing the Voting Rights Act by declaring, “We shall overcome.”

The Supreme Court gutted the enforcement provision of that law in a 5-4 decision in 2013.

President-elect Trump concluded his recent tweet to Congressman Lewis by saying, “All talk, talk, talk – no action or results. Sad.”

My response: Enact the “Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2014,” which would restore the protections undone by the Supreme Court.

The lead sponsors in the House of Representatives are both former chairs of the Judiciary Committee, which wrote this law.

One is a Democrat and one is a Republican.

On voting rights, Mr. Trump is not alone.

In light of the response that my post/letter to the editor generated, some additional thoughts.

North Carolina’s restrictive voting law imposed voter-ID requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days, and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm African-Americans’ right to vote.

“The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision” and “impose cures for problems that did not exist,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel that struck down the law for violating the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. “Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the State’s true motivation.”

A recent study looked at around a billion ballots cast in the United States from 2000 through 2014 and found only 31 instances of impersonation fraud at the polls.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/?tid=a_inl

Mr. Trump is not alone in relying on ungrounded assertions of voter fraud. Republican-dominated state legislatures have passed restrictive voter-ID laws in approximately 20 states since the 2010 election.

 

 

January 21 – The most fundamental right a citizen has

“When I spoke to this body on Opening Day, I talked about our obligation to address the needs of the least among us,” I began my speech on the House floor today.

“The people who would be able to vote because of this bill – those who have been imprisoned but are now on parole, are the least among us.

“But when George Washington was elected our first President, only white men with property could vote.  The majority of the adult population was the least among us.

“Voting is not a reward. This debate is not a distraction from other more important issues, as some have contended.

“This debate is about the most fundamental right a citizen has.

“John Lewis knew that when he marched across the Edmund Pettis Bridge in Selma. President Johnson knew that when he introduced the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  And the Supreme Court knew that when it declared that the right to vote preserves other basic rights.”

The Governor’s veto was overridden, 85-56.

  • My Key Issues:

  • Pimlico and The Preakness
  • Our Neighborhoods
  • Pre-Kindergarten
  • Lead Paint Poisoning